The Palatka daily news. (Palatka, Fla.) 1884-1888, 1887-05-05
CALLED THEM "CADS."
The Debate i'm the House If Commons a
the ..Time.'' Article.

NtLLED ] II IN y ADS.
The Debate i'm the House syf Commons ON
the Times Article.
LONDON. MAY Hon. ". II. Smith.
First Lord of the Treasury. announced
in the House of Commons. this after
noon, that the government had resolved
that the allegation that the statement by
the London Times that Mr.. Dillon told Il
falsehoOd while den wing in the House
of Com mons that the papers utterances
concerning his alleged relations with
Sheridan the '-lnvincible" was a breach
of privilege was not sustained 10y prece-
dent. Continuing. Mr. Smith sail il
would be against the dignity of the
House To- summons the Times To
the bar without previously inquiring
into the circumstances. The gentleman
below the gangway. Mr. Smith added,
asked that a select committee he consti-
tuted tO inquire forthwith into the ale
cations of the Times. The practice of
the House had been to divest itself as far
as possible Of judicial duty. The gov
ernment thought such committee a.
was asked for would be untitled To CON
slider such grave questions as would have
To b- referred To ii for decision. The
government. feeling it To- be its duty to
end-avor Ia solve the question. had in
structed the attorney general. and such
Others that he cared To- associate with
him. To- prosecute the Times for libel on
Mr.. Dillon, who was at liberty to employ
such counsel a. he saw fit In conclusion
Sir. Smith urged the Hou,.. to accept the
course. proposed.
\ SHARP REPI.N.
/. i. O'Connor condemned the gov
ernment's proposal. He said he com
miserated the government over their
humiliatlng and degrading proposition.
Their proposal was really for colmsion
in an action at law mad. by the vaIor of
libel. oConnor here produced a copy of
the Times containing a libel ON Mr. Dill
Ion and tiourishing it aloft he said: Il
purchased this copy of the Times at one
of the bOok-talls owned by the Right
Honorable First Lord of the Treasury.
1t is he. speaking for the government.
who says NO breach of privilege was
committed. Irish cheers lie Is there
fore deeply Interested as a party in the
case against the editor of the Times The
two men ought to be- in the dock togeth-
or. The Irish members reject his proposal
"a unfair. unjust and Unprecedented The
House of Commons ought not IL b,- ken
in by this colIusive action.
AN AWFUI. EPITHFr.
Here Edwin DeIisle Conservative
member for Middle Leice-tershire, arose
to point of order. He said he had
heard Charles Tanner. HuHvA Rule MEM
her for Middle Cork. say Conservatives
were ''D"d lot uf cid~."
Irish VOiCt-S---~o Won are"
Speaker PerIe; The Clerk of the
House Will pleas ~e,- that the words are
taken down.
Mr. Tanner denied that La, had used the
word Damned" He repeated. however
that the Conservatives werea lot of c;lds
The Speaker said he must Withdraw
the expression and apologizr. Mr. Tan
ner said he would do so.
Sir William Vernon Harcourt de
nOunced the government PROPOSAL.
No PRECEDENT.
Sir Edward Clark. Solicitor General.
moved an amendment to the govern
ment's proposal to the effect that the.
House did not consider the Times state
ments concerning Dillon "A breach of
privilege. In justifying his action in
offering the amendment. Sir Edward de-
clared that there was no record of the
Parliament having committed a man To-
custody for breach of privilege such as
the action of the Times was now alleged
tn be. He added that he and the attor-
ney general We're responsible for the
advice on which the Government had
acted. He proposed to confine himself
to the legal points of the case regard
less of party politics. He then quoted
precedentS To show that the House was
not the proper tribunal to deal
with such matters nor hal any
contempt of the House bee n
exhibited such a had constituted the Of
fense i'll previous eases where a breach
of privilege has been committed. The
| course of prosecution. the solicitor gen
eral said. would be left To such person "a
| the Irish members might nominate
both counsel and solicitors. If the gov
ernment We're asked To- appoint them
| they would interpose no objection. In
conclusion. Sir Edward slightly modi-
fled his amendment. making il read.
that the House declines To- treat the
| Times publication a. a breach of privi-
| Iege.
ANOTHER VIEW OF 1T.
Sir Charles Russell Liberal coHtended
that as Dillon'S conduct in the House
had been attacked that fact constituted
"A breach of privilege and it was the duty
of the House and primarily incumbent
on the government leader of the House
| Mr.. Smith. to take action To protect the
| honor of lis members. The cOurst, pro
posed by the governments motion was
an evasion of this duty. The question
was not So much whether the commit
| tee should be appointed. a. whether the
| House intended to pas, AN imputatiou
/ against Mr.. Dillon and say before tn.
| world that fragrant as the Offen>e wa,
| it was not of such a character a. consti-
tuted "A breach Of privilege.
| PRINA FACIE CASE.
! Lord Randolph Churchill admitte,
+ that the case presented prima faci,
breach of privilege but he thought the
House was not refusing a Judicial III